Other conditions decisions — 2010

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to his death during the pendency of the appeal.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to determine if the Veteran's current perforated tympanic membrane is related to his service, specifically as a residual of his head injury during service.

The Board has determined that the initial grant of service connection for lower back pain was not clearly and unmistakably erroneous, and thus service connection should be restored.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for a gunshot wound with cuneiform and navicular fracture of the left foot was denied. The RO also denied his claims for service connection for degenerative disc disease and compression deformities, thoracic spine, and degenerative disc disease with foraminal stenosis, lumbar spine.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's emphysema is related to service, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disorder of the feet, thus denying the application.

The Veteran does not have service-connected defective hearing as his current hearing loss is not shown to be related to military service, including noise exposure.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further examination and evaluation of his service-connected disability, as well as consideration of his claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability. The case will be returned to the Board for further action.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a more contemporaneous VA examination and the need to obtain outstanding medical records.

The Veteran's claim for an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for a rectal abscess/fistula is being remanded due to the need to obtain additional medical records and conduct further examination.

The Veteran's right knee disability, including chondromalacia and degenerative joint disease, is currently rated at 10 percent. The condition does not warrant a higher evaluation as the flexion limitation does not reach a compensable degree.

The Veteran's VA compensation benefits were properly apportioned to his former spouse and dependent children, as the Veteran was not reasonably discharging his child support responsibility.

The Board denied a compensable disability rating for the residuals of removal of a hemangioma behind the right ear and denied service connection for actinic keratoses of the scalp.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a 20 percent rating for his service-connected GSW residuals of the left forearm was denied. The Board found that there was no clear and unmistakable error in the April 1946 decision, which awarded a 10 percent rating based on moderate injury to Muscle Group VIII.

The Board has determined that a VA examination is needed to determine if the Veteran currently suffers from a liver disability or disease, and whether any such disability had its onset in service. The Veteran's claims for service connection will be remanded for further review.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of malaria and therefore, service connection for this condition cannot be granted.

The Veteran's eligibility for education benefits under the Post-Vietnam Era Veterans' Educational Assistance Program (Chapter 32) has been denied as he forfeited his right to participate in the program when he disenrolled and received a refund of contributions.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including a new VA examination and the acquisition of additional medical records.

The appellant is requesting an apportionment of the Veteran's compensation benefits on behalf of their minor children. The Veteran was notified of a May 2008 Special Apportionment Decision, but did not file an NOD. The appellant filed an NOD in May 2008 and received a December 2008 SOC, but was not provided with the January 2010 SSOC or the substance of the appellant's VA Form 9 dated in January 2010. As a result, the Veteran needs to be furnished an SSOC and informed of the content of the appellant's substantive appeal.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for adipsia has been remanded due to the need for a Gulf War examination and further clarification of his symptoms.